| gabriel rosenkoetter on Sat, 27 Oct 2001 02:48:15 -0400 |
|
On Fri, Oct 26, 2001 at 07:03:42PM -0400, Paul wrote:
> To be truthful, which is no problem for me, I have no clue! I would
> link to a newer version if anything. All I know is that I had a
> problem when I installed LICQ, I think it was. All I did was create a
> symbolic link and it worked. I don't even remember how I figued that
> out.
While this may seem to work now, you're liable to run into very
confusing problems if you install software that really does need the
libc.so.5 interface but ends up getting a different one. You *might*
never see this if you've linked libc.so.5 to a newer version, since
(especially after all the flak Linux took going between libc and
glibc), current Linux libcs *might* be backwards compatible.
As a general rule, though, you don't want to lie to programs about
which shared objects they're getting. They aren't lying to you about
which ones they need.
--
~ g r @ eclipsed.net
Attachment:
pgpv6iJpP0xPW.pgp
|
|